get_schools

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, leaving the description to carry the disclosure burden. It does disclose the rating scale (1-10) and source (GreatSchools district rating). However, it doesn't say whether this is a read operation, what happens with invalid town names, or whether it returns per-school or district-level data. Some useful context, but gaps remain.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single compact sentence with zero wasted words. The parenthetical adds the scale and source detail efficiently. Appropriate length for a simple one-parameter tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter look-up tool, this is near-adequate. No output schema exists, so the description doesn't explain the return format, but for a rating lookup the '1-10' scale disclosure helps. It could clarify whether output is a single number or a breakdown, but for this complexity level it's reasonably complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. The lone parameter 'town' is a string and its meaning is self-evident from the description's 'one town' phrasing. The description confirms the town parameter scope but adds little beyond what the parameter name implies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb+resource+scope: 'School rating for one town' with a specific metric (GreatSchools district rating, 1-10). It's distinguishable from siblings (get_housing, get_distance, get_safety) which cover different domains. The parenthetical adds precision about what kind of rating and its scale.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this returns school ratings scoped to a single town, contrasting with broader alternatives. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives or exclude other use cases. The 'one town' scoping is the only guidance, which is modest but helpful.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.